advanced driving licence

[classicsl]

Does haing such lower insurance premiums?

 

[pascal]

Or does it increase your premium?:grin:

 

[SLinKyjoe]

eee eck....there are two types......the istitute of advanced motorists and the royal soc for prevention of accidents.

IAM and ROSPA.

you need to talk to your insurnace company to see if the do, or go do a interwebnet search for the above to see....one of the tests is a one off, so when you have done it you can drive about lording over plebs even 20 years later when they have taken the new tests in todays driving and are far better drivers...and the other is an annual test to keep you up to date, and the one to have if you want it.....

but i suspect that insurance firms do like they do when they go cheap insurance for women, emergency services, MBOA members etc and if you do a search you will find they bump up the premium for the special cases....and normal insurnace can work out cheaper.....so you need to compare different companys.

i think the only way to reduce insurances is to shop around and limit your milage if you can. other things are marketing gimmicks.

my collegue last night was raving on about tesco insurance quote he just had...so we went online to try and beat it....he even spoke on the fone to direct line, his insurer, and they cudnt touch it

after one online quotation bash at privilge, (part of direct line) i had saved him £30. and tesco refused to budge....one call to privilge and a further £18 was knocked off....no specials deals...just the ad that says if you quote is over £300 we will gaurentee to beat it..they did. top job.

 

[mlc]

I am a member of the IAM having past the test in 1990. What this means is:

I can drive around lording it over plebs 15 years after the event
I can tell the kids that they have to listen to me because I have an advanced license
On the only occasion that I have been stopped by the police in the last 15 years we ended up talking about our mutual interest in safe driving

I am supposed to be about 40% less likely to have an accident than other men of my age, experience etc. however I have never saved a penny on car insurance renewals.

Despite the above I would recommend the process. I took the test when I first had a high powered car. Everyone thinks hes a great driver and I wanted some sort of independant confirmation. I learnt lots and still do, we have two teenage drivers in our household and I have learnt from both of them.

Mark.

 

[SLinKyjoe]

hmmm, just to add. i do beleive in retesting people as i think people need to be kept up to date.

As Nephew says. IAM is the one off test so i assume the ROSPA variant is the annual test.

if you are a driving instructor i supose the annual test would be good as it really keeps you on top of the game.

if you just want to improve you driving skills the the IAM test will certainly do that. And it wont be wasted money if you are interested in driving. Just make sure you keep up to date.

The lording over the plebs remark is actually meant to be offensive to those who took the test a million years ago and have now formed these vigilante moblie speed controls, the middle lane drivers and those retards who insist on driving there cars below any speed limits using the defence that the speed limit in a maximum speed not minimum. this shows a basic lack of understanding of the speed laws and these people should not be allowed on the road.

I have never got around to taking an advanced drivers test as a few years back i was talking to a ROSPA geezer and expressed an interest. He stated, as i had taken a psv, and hgv2 and then hgv1 licence, that i had as good a training as you would get in the advanced training. I did however, do a brake driving thingy test that was sponsored by some government intiative and unfortunatly i had already be trained in the art of these driving techinques...so it was a wasted day as it happens.

 

[lordylawks]

My father was a class 1 driver in the Met Police many years ago. Once I had passed my test and driven a few miles he taught me to drive properly. I have always driven with a healthily extended right foot and considered my driving skills rather above average. Recently, I let someone who had been a racing driver take down a winding route from Stroud to Cheltenham which normally takes me around 25 minutes. He managed it in 15, was smoother through the corners and felt safe as houses. I am now thinking it's time to get some track days in and perhaps go back to school .....

Regards insurance, it would be nice if it made a difference but honestly, I just love the fact that you never stop learning.

 

[mlc]

I did of course realise that Uncle's "pleb" comment was meant to be an insult. I am not active in the IAM but I do understand that some members think of it more as I AM! however I am not sure that the nutters who buy their own speed guns are automatically members of the institute.

This could become an interesting thread - because your comments suggest that people who drive within legal limits are some how wrong, which of course is incorrect - the magic word here is "legal". Whilst I am as bad as the next person and break speed limits every day it is of course wrong and in Blairs Britain it is becoming harder to get away with.

Putting aside the legal side of things, the real problem (in my opinion) is that driving standards in the UK are poor. We all know someone that is dangerous at 30 in town and should never be allowed anywhere near a motorway. Driving in Germany is wonderful, they all seem to drive down the autobahn with their foot on the floor, but you never get cut up and you appear to be totally safe. It strikes me that we should be looking for formal ways to increase driving skills and then road safety will follow.

Mark.

 

[lordylawks]

Couldn't agree more. Few cars don't have the potential to top 100 and fewer drivers know how to drive at this speed. Perhaps a more realistic approach to driving lessons and the actuality of performance in modern cars is needed?

 

[mlc]

Nice to hear at least one person agreeing. At the risk of sounding like my Dad, things have changed for the worse in the 30 years I have been driving. First of all cars have got so much faster: the average driver in his mini, escort and similar had a top speed around 80 - 85, 0 to 60 times of 20+ seconds. The top of the range Vauxhall in 1973 was 3.3 litres and 125 BHP, that did 60 in 12 seconds. I used to travel from Manchester to Birmingham without ever lifting my foot off the floor in my morris 1100 - at 80 mph. If we move onto to 2005 then 125 bhp becomes entry level, anything taking 10 seconds to 60 is too slow to consider, the roads are far busier and what about the driving test - it takes 10 minutes longer, you now need to know how to park, you need to know how to open the bonnet and you need to learn the answers to the standard theory questions. Its the equivalent of letting someone learn to fly a single seater then taking out a jumbo the next week. Its no wonder that so many 17 - 24 year olds kill themselves, whe may as well just give them loaded guns.

Thats the end of my rant for tonight

Mark.

 

[SLinKyjoe]

quite right. we should be retested and if you fail you should be retaught. I have been an advocate for re-testing every 5 years, not poplur but i think it is nescary. stops those who think they know it all driving around.

todays traffic is far removed from that of 20years ago.

some people put there bad driving habits down to being legal and being safe...neither of which is correct. bad driving is bad.

some people do go around under the misaprehenion that not havning had an accident menad they are safe and good drivers and do lots of tuting when they see accidents which often befall good drivers.

accidents are not to seak, they happen to anyone good or bad. Some people suggest that a driver who is not competant to drive the vehcile they are in at the time, have accidents as a result of the vehcile. This is also wrong, they have made a basic error in thinking they are better than ther rteally are and make a mistake in driving and the result is wot looks like and accident. they should not have been doing it in the first place.

education is needed and it doesnt stop as a result of age, experince nor of passing the one and only test.

thats my view.

Hope the nephew isnt too upset by my mailcious remarks....i am on his side with this....just not the sie of the vocal few who announce just how good they are doing 4 mph with ques of traffic who could be better off driving at 5mph. Due care and consideration for others is often over looked as blatant ignorance rules the day. It is my road, i paid for it and i shall drive on it as i like. thus ruining everyone elses attempts to drive within the law which is there for all to follow.


and jumbos are easy to fly. i have a simulator on my pc and after 5 mins i can fly any aircraft anywhere in the world. I even got a b777 onto the runway at London City docklands....flew into the thames on take off tho.

 

[jules335500]

agree with all and believe track days r the best way to improve ur driving skills as well as advanced driving.
have done track days on my ducati and have improved my riding no end.........cant imagine taking my c180 around the track mind you!!!!!!!

 

[SLinKyjoe]

dont take your own...take someone elses......ask them first tho...

 

[jules335500]

take ur car joe......will pay for petrol...lol

 

[SLinKyjoe]

errrrr......Nope.

just ask for an extended test drive and book it on a day when track days are on...see easy.

subaru did a whole 24hrs with the latest WRX if you looked like you were really serious about buying one....and they made absolutly certain that there were no track days in the country when you got it...not so daft are they?

they wont check if you ask for a really long ride in a 2nd hand deisel A-Class. and just think of the fun.

even better, offer to buy a Merc van and you get one of them for the day to see how good they are and how much you can fit in them....off round sillystone in the Vito! you will still be laughing a week later.

 

[lordylawks]

Okey dokey .... er Jules, can I take your C180 round the test track?

Retesting would not be a bad idea but perhaps more relevant is what has happened with motorbikes. Given that 93% of fatal accidents involve 17 - 23 year old males, limiting the top speed and BHP for drivers until they reach mid 20's would seem not unreasonable. I know this sounds rather to much like yet more nanny state mentality but the death rate for motorcyles has dropped massively since the restrictions were bought in.

As a quick aside, most police I have spoken to would support a 100 mph speed limit on the motorway as the facts show the speed itself is almost never a contributory factor in motorway accidents.

 

[SLinKyjoe]

speed doesnt kill...its the rapid decelleration that does your internal organs.

you are restricted on motorbikes and you are restricted on aircraft....but not on cars..

i think the nanny state doesnt exist in this argument as we are trying to train people to drive...the nanny state prevents you from doing anything even if you are deemed competant and it is too many doo-gooders that are to blame there. the nanny state stops the school run in 4x4's! Why? Good vision, loads of room! and they dont drive about fast.

bear in mind the nanny state wishes to prevent motorsport from being broadcast on tv as it makes 14 years olds go out and steal cars and drive them. not exaclty sure how they arrive at this idea. I have watch motor racing since i cant remember, not once have i wanted to steal a car.

 

[lordylawks]

It's poor driving that kilss. Televised motorsport persuades 14 year olds to steal cars? What does watching government ministers lie through their teeth make 'em do?

 

[SLinKyjoe]

when was the last time you ever heard of anyone watch or listen to a government minister...even the cabinet doesnt listen to them.


anyhow to get back on track. it does seem that advanced driving doesnt help your insurance premiums yet anyway!

 

[mlc]

Cant agree that 4 x 4 dont drive fast - come and join the cheshire set with their range rovers, the school run is more like LeMans! and they cant see where they are going or stick to a lane.

We do limit youngsters to lower power cars, because insurance is so expensive, however that just means that too many of them dont bother, or they drive company cars. If the government was really keen to save lives they would limit engine power for the novice drivers and require a further test to move up. My daughter had a class mate at 17 with an Audi TT, that seemed madness to me.

Mark.

 

[lordylawks]

Thanks for the thread sat nav correction there.

I checked with an older member of the family and back in the 70's he used to get a 15% discount for having passed the advanced driving course but no longer. Frankly, insurance companies are more interested in insuring only those who are unlikely to claim or will load the premiums accordingly - as ever it's been. I'd imagine their take would be that an advanced driver is someone who likes driving and therefore spends more time on the road. Statistically, therefore, they are more likely to be involved in an accident - or something like that anyway.